Legal Opinion
Soto v. Tu Phuoc Nguyen
District Court, E.D. California
Decided June 29, 2009No. 2:06-cv-01612-MCE-DAD, 2:06-cv-02077-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-00398-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-01229-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-01231-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-01255-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-01630-MCE-DAD, 2:07-cv-01934-MCE-DADPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., District Judge.
Plaintiffs initiated these actions seeking relief for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of a 2005 bus accident. Presently before the Court are Motions for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Greyhound Lines, Inc. (“Greyhound”), by which Greyhound argues Plaintiffs’ negligence claims, to the extent premised on a failure to provide passenger seat belts, are preempted by federal law and violate the Commerce Clause, U.S. Const., art. I, § 8, cl. 3. For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motions are denied.
STANDARD
The Federal Rules of Civil…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clifton A. Lake v. The Memphis Landsmen, LLCTennessee Supreme Court · 2013
- Noveck v. PV Holdings Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2010